The professor has a meeting with the student, but the student lies about what happened. The professor gives the student a zero on the assignment. The professor and the student both sign an Honor Code Violation Form, and the Academic Honor Council analyzes the case as a neutral third party to decide whether it will be reported to the university.

The professor tells the student not to do it again, but the student still gets full credit.

The student admits what happened, and the professor allows the student to redo the assignment for partial credit.

The student already has an academic honor code violation in their academic history, so the situation is more serious the second time. The Academic Honor Council may impose a penalty such as a failing grade in the course, suspension, or dismissal from the college.

The student ignores the email, and the professor doesn't bring it up again.

They encourage shortcuts in the learning process, which significantly worsens student performance

They often "hallucinate" or make up information that is not true

They do not have independent access to scholarly, peer-reviewed information

They often write badly

Regular use of them has been documented to worsen users' ability to think for themselves

Getting information about a reading but then not citing it

Seeing 1-2 sentences of information about religion and then putting quotation marks around the sentences and providing a citation

Paraphrasing what AI has said and not citing it

Editing a written assignment so that the grammar is easier to read and then providing a citation

Having an assignment written for you

Asking a question about a concept in the lectures and then verifying the answer with another more reputable source